To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

168
Three Score and Ten in Retrospect
lands covered by the permits of two Indians, David Tabbee and Pawwinnee. A demand was made to end the "apparent moratorium on presecution of offenses against the United States where rights of the Ute Indians are concerned." It was further stated that if the solicitor's opinion affecting the problem could be released before the next Tribal Business Committee meeting on February 10, it might serve as a guide in reaching some permanent settlement. A copy of the letter thus expressing our attitude was sent to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. On the 5th day of February, 1947, the Flannery memorandum dated December 10, 1946, was approved by C. Girard Davidson, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Whether our protestations were effective or merely coincidental makes little difference. The fact remains that the release of the opinion did furnish an effective guide for settlement. This appears as an appropriate place to acknowledge the studious devotion, the courteous manner and the ingrained fairness of Bill Flannery whose influence on the final settlement cannot be denied. The Solicitor's opinion provided for a special impartial examiner to adjudicate the conflicting claims in conformity with the Federal Range Code, except (1)Indian base properties not submitted prior to June 28, 1938, were allowed to be used, and (2) the determination of the grazing privileges attaching to base properties purchased for the Indians were to be made on the basis of grazing use during the priority period and upon the productivity of the base properties at the time of the acceptance of options by the Indians. The allocation of federal range was to be made, however, on the basis of productivity of the base at the time of adjudication, the difference to be considered in a nonuse status with grazing privileges to attach as productivity of the base property was restored. After elimination of unqualified and Class 2 applicant, those shifted into Unit G from other states or other parts of District 8 were to be subordinated to those customarily within the area. The troublesome factors of loss of productivity of lands while being accumulated for the Indians and the moving of livestock interests from Colorado to

168
Three Score and Ten in Retrospect
lands covered by the permits of two Indians, David Tabbee and Pawwinnee. A demand was made to end the "apparent moratorium on presecution of offenses against the United States where rights of the Ute Indians are concerned." It was further stated that if the solicitor's opinion affecting the problem could be released before the next Tribal Business Committee meeting on February 10, it might serve as a guide in reaching some permanent settlement. A copy of the letter thus expressing our attitude was sent to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. On the 5th day of February, 1947, the Flannery memorandum dated December 10, 1946, was approved by C. Girard Davidson, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Whether our protestations were effective or merely coincidental makes little difference. The fact remains that the release of the opinion did furnish an effective guide for settlement. This appears as an appropriate place to acknowledge the studious devotion, the courteous manner and the ingrained fairness of Bill Flannery whose influence on the final settlement cannot be denied. The Solicitor's opinion provided for a special impartial examiner to adjudicate the conflicting claims in conformity with the Federal Range Code, except (1)Indian base properties not submitted prior to June 28, 1938, were allowed to be used, and (2) the determination of the grazing privileges attaching to base properties purchased for the Indians were to be made on the basis of grazing use during the priority period and upon the productivity of the base properties at the time of the acceptance of options by the Indians. The allocation of federal range was to be made, however, on the basis of productivity of the base at the time of adjudication, the difference to be considered in a nonuse status with grazing privileges to attach as productivity of the base property was restored. After elimination of unqualified and Class 2 applicant, those shifted into Unit G from other states or other parts of District 8 were to be subordinated to those customarily within the area. The troublesome factors of loss of productivity of lands while being accumulated for the Indians and the moving of livestock interests from Colorado to